Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Karmaa]

the part about "Clothes (last reported wearing) - makes me think this is nothing but speculation and not gotten from an inside source at all. IF LE has the clothes that she was supposedly "kidnapped" in - then I would think that they would have enough to make an arrest. JMO

Thanks - that's where I was going to go too.

Debbie said that she put Lisa in the crib with her glow-worm. If the toy, the clothes Lisa was supposedly wearing and anything else from her crib was on the floor near Debbie's bed, that would either mean she lied, or she was involved.

If this is true (ie: confirmed by a legitimate source) it would be really important. However, it's like that psychic, in my mind. It's all too conveniently based on bits of information we already know.

If this "source" is really close to the investigation and knows anything, why would they just regurgitate information we already know? You would think they would cough up something we DON'T know.

 

[Oriah]

Hi,
I'd like to ask if a cadaver dog would hit on amniotic fluid? Especially if it had been left some for some before being cleaned up.
Thank you.
I have really enjoyed reading all the questions and answers. Have learned a lot about these marvelous dogs.

That is an excellent question, and one that I personally don't know that I can answer with 100% clarity- but will try as best I can.

Cells from menstrual fluid, endometrial cells, amniotic fluid/cells, and umbilical cord cells all seem to contain one of the same 'scents' to HRD dogs trained for scent discrimination of DNA.

That does not mean a K9 cannot scent distiguish between all of the above samples NOT utilizing DNA- but it does mean (imvho) that there is a singular identifying characteristic among them all- and that's DNA. Or at least- that's what we know of at this point. It's not necessarily HRD scent but it can be if the cells are aged to be remains.

Wow- that probably just confused a bunch of people. Hope it made some sense.

 

[Nixie]

If a dog hits on something does that mean it can be tested for DNA and if so can they tell if it is from death? If the hit was on a blanket or something that absorbs fluid would it be tested? I know its a smell but is there anything physical or just a gas. TIA

 

[Donjeta]

If RR is correct about the dog hitting on Lisa's clothes amniotic fluid seems like an unlikely source imo. If the hit was on the carpet or the bedding it would be a good explanation but I'm not sure how her clothes and toys would have got amniotic fluid on them.

 

[Nixie]

The more I think about this report the more I wonder about it. Why would the police "leak" this info or anyone connected to the case. The parents already look guilty and I don't see a report like this making them talk to police it would be more likely this would make them more prepared. Their lawyers would know what LE is going to throw at them if they ever get a chance. Maybe some slipped and told RR thinking he would keep it to himself/find more information on this subject. Maybe RR is talking about other people to much.....no clue just seems so weird he would find out the info before LE could throw it at the parents and catch them off guard with it. I also wonder if anyone is asking LE to confirm or deny this. Does LE still talk to the press about this case on a regular basis?

 

[indepmo]

Leaks are very common, from government leaks, political leaks, law enforcement leaks, product leaks, and the list goes on.

I'm pretty confident about three things here.

1: I doubt RR would publish a comment of this nature without it coming from a credible source. Why tarnish your reputation and publish information from a non-credible source?

2: I doubt LE will confirm or deny this information since it is an ongoing investigation, especially if it's a major key to this investigation.

3: Everyone will have their own opinion on this information, just like politics and religion. The only thing all of us can do is wait for the truth to be told, if and when that happens.

 

[hambirg]

Leaks are very common, from government leaks, political leaks, law enforcement leaks, product leaks, and the list goes on.

I'm pretty confident about three things here.

1: I doubt RR would publish a comment of this nature without it coming from a credible source. Why tarnish your reputation and publish information from a non-credible source?

2: I doubt LE will confirm or deny this information since it is an ongoing investigation, especially if it's a major key to this investigation.

3: Everyone will have their own opinion on this information, just like politics and religion. The only thing all of us can do is wait for the truth to be told, if and when that happens.

I agree. And I think the timing of leaks is usually crucial too. So why would this be leaked now? The only thing I can come up with is, isn't the custody hearing on the 7th?

 

[Sherbie]

I agree. And I think the timing of leaks is usually crucial too. So why would this be leaked now? The only thing I can come up with is, isn't the custody hearing on the 7th?

If the information is true and if it was purposely leaked, maybe the reason would be to put pressure on a suspect - maybe try to get them to enter a plea agreement in exchange for telling where the baby is. (Sort of a "we're on to you and we're coming for you soon" kinda thing.) Or to let someone associated with a suspect know LE is on to the suspect in hopes the other person will give up some info.

Not that there's any indication that's happened in this case...just another if/then possibility.

 

[hambirg]

If the information is true and if it was purposely leaked, maybe the reason would be to put pressure on a suspect - maybe try to get them to enter a plea agreement in exchange for telling where the baby is. (Sort of a "we're on to you and we're coming for you soon" kinda thing.) Or to let someone associated with a suspect know LE is on to the suspect in hopes the other person will give up some info.

Not that there's any indication that's happened in this case...just another if/then possibility.

This is exactly what I think. I think they are trying to put some pressure on JI. MOO and all that.

 

[Detective Klimpt]

I'm confused...someone help me out here.
The cadaver dog hit before they got the warrant, correct? Yet, they did not remove the toy, clothing, blanket, and tape stuff until when they went in with the warrant. Did they take another dog with them the day of the warrant? If the dog hit on the various items the first time it was in the house, then why didn't they take those items then? Were they not permitted to do that?

Until today's info from Ruggen, I was scratching my head about the significance of the items taken with the warrant. Now, I tend to believe what Ruggen is saying. Before, we were only told the dog hit on an area of the floor by the bed.

Now that those items are in possession of LE, would the scent stay on them for a while so that several cadaver dogs could confirm death? That would be enough to get me off the fence. Still though, this doesn't put the smoking gun in DB's hand, but she would certainly be involved in some way.

Gosh, doesn't the family of DB/JI know how bad all this sounds for them?

 

[hambirg]

I'm confused...someone help me out here.
The cadaver dog hit before they got the warrant, correct? Yet, they did not remove the toy, clothing, blanket, and tape stuff until when they went in with the warrant. Did they take another dog with them the day of the warrant? If the dog hit on the various items the first time it was in the house, then why didn't they take those items then? Were they not permitted to do that?

Until today's info from Ruggen, I was scratching my head about the significance of the items taken with the warrant. Now, I tend to believe what Ruggen is saying. Before, we were only told the dog hit on an area of the floor by the bed.

Now that those items are in possession of LE, would the scent stay on them for a while so that several cadaver dogs could confirm death? That would be enough to get me off the fence. Still though, this doesn't put the smoking gun in DB's hand, but she would certainly be involved in some way.

Gosh, doesn't the family of DB/JI know how bad all this sounds for them?

I'm not sure as to when these new possible hits happened. But I would think that LE may have wanted to take them under the protection of a warrant, so that they couldn't later be dismissed. Maybe somebody with more knowledge of SOP of searches could shed some light on that. And if the hits really happened, I'm sure LE tried to verify them. It's my understanding that there were dogs at both searches.

MOO

 

[Jacie Estes]

Wow: I personally trust Ron's reporting. He has been very reserved accurate IMO.

http://www.facebook.com/KansasCityPI/posts/10150436681582453

Rugen Team Investigations, LLC Missouri Private Investigator
A source close to law enforcement tells me that cadaver dog in the Lisa Irwin missing baby case hit on a blanket, a toy, and her clothes last reported wearing. If true, that means the fluid that secretes from the body upon death were possibly on those items.

He is a blogger and uses FB as a medium. He does not have to adhere to the standards of ethical journalists. I can't see LE using him as a conduit. Has his FB been ok'd as an 'approved source' for the purpose of this forum, not MSM but still acceptable? TIA

 

[3doglady]

I'm confused...someone help me out here.
The cadaver dog hit before they got the warrant, correct? Yet, they did not remove the toy, clothing, blanket, and tape stuff until when they went in with the warrant. Did they take another dog with them the day of the warrant? If the dog hit on the various items the first time it was in the house, then why didn't they take those items then? Were they not permitted to do that?

Until today's info from Ruggen, I was scratching my head about the significance of the items taken with the warrant. Now, I tend to believe what Ruggen is saying. Before, we were only told the dog hit on an area of the floor by the bed.

Now that those items are in possession of LE, would the scent stay on them for a while so that several cadaver dogs could confirm death? That would be enough to get me off the fence. Still though, this doesn't put the smoking gun in DB's hand, but she would certainly be involved in some way.

Gosh, doesn't the family of DB/JI know how bad all this sounds for them?

BBM There was a significant amount of time between the time the dogs were first taken in the house and the warrant. I just can't see LE leaving those items of potential evidence in the house to be destroyed or disposed of. LE was given permission to search and take what they needed. If they felt a warrant was needed, they could have immediately gotten one for those items. I can't think of a scenario where leaving important evidence in a house that has been released would make sense. I'm not buying his story.

 

[Donjeta]

He is a blogger and uses FB as a medium. He does not have to adhere to the standards of ethical journalists. I can't see LE using him as a conduit. Has his FB been ok'd as an 'approved source' for the purpose of this forum, not MSM but still acceptable? TIA

IDK but apparently he was ok'd to appear on the Websleuths radio show a while back.

 

[In da Middle]

BBM There was a significant amount of time between the time the dogs were first taken in the house and the warrant. I just can't see LE leaving those items of potential evidence in the house to be destroyed or disposed of. LE was given permission to search and take what they needed. If they felt a warrant was needed, they could have immediately gotten one for those items. I can't think of a scenario where leaving important evidence in a house that has been released would make sense. I'm not buying his story.

I am only buying his story if it is to be found that the clothing is the exact clothing described as last wearing AND that they found it hidden somewhere with the search warrant. Otherwise we are talking parents that are smart enough to hide a baby so good that even all of these searches couldn't find and couldn't be broken in interrogations, but were stupid enough to leave the clothing.:waitasec: And to let them have permission for the dogs in to get the hit in the first place?

 

[hambirg]

I am only buying his story if it is to be found that the clothing is the exact clothing described as last wearing AND that they found it hidden somewhere with the search warrant. Otherwise we are talking parents that are smart enough to hide a baby so good that even all of these searches couldn't find and couldn't be broken in interrogations, but were stupid enough to leave the clothing.:waitasec: And to let them have permission for the dogs in to get the hit in the first place?

It doesn't take a brainiac to dump a small body in the river.

 

[Detective Klimpt]

It doesn't take a brainiac to dump a small body in the river.

So far, I haven't read even one <believable> theory about how she accomplished that. Everyone can say 'she did it' 'baby is in the river', but nobody can tie the loose ends, like the cell phones and the lights into the timeline.

 

[In da Middle]

It doesn't take a brainiac to dump a small body in the river.

And go through all of this and leave the clothes and blanket behind??????

 

[In da Middle]

So far, I haven't read even one <believable> theory about how she accomplished that. Everyone can say 'she did it' 'baby is in the river', but nobody can tie the loose ends, like the cell phones and the lights into the timeline.

Yes, and even though the river looks close on a google map, it does not show you what all you have to go through to actually get to the water and be able to toss a baby in it in the dark, no less. The bridges have cameras also.

 

[matou]

Can LE just take property out of a house if a search dog hits on it? The search warrant was executed on the 19th and the dog hit on the 17th: http://media2.nbcactionnews.com/NWT/pdf/20111021_irwinwarrant.pdf